A30189:178
An answer to two treatises of Mr. John Can, the leader of the English…An answer to two treatises of Mr. Iohn Can, the leader of the English…
An answer to two treatises of Mr. John Can, the leader of the English Brownists in Amsterdam the former called, A necessity of separation from the Church of England, proved by the Nonconformists principles : the other, A stay against straying : wherein in opposition to M. John Robinson, he undertakes to prove the unlawfulness of hearing the ministers of the Church of England ... / by the late learned, laborious and faithful servant of Jesus Christ, John Ball.An answer to two treatises of Mr. Iohn Can, the leader of the English Brownists in Amsterdam the former called, A necessitie of separation from the Church of England, proved by the Nonconformists principles : the other, A stay against straying : wherein in opposition to M. Iohn Robinson, he undertakes to prove the unlawfulnesse of hearing the ministers of the Church of England ... / by the late learned, laborious and faithfull servant of Jesus Christ, John Ball.
London: printed by R.B., 1642
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Such things (saith Aaron) have befallen me, and if I had eaten the sin-offering to day, should it have been good in the eyes of the Lord? In these words Aaron excuseth himself, by reason of his sorrow, which made him unfit and unworthy to eat of those holy things. Deutr. 12.7. & 26.14. Hos. 9.4.
Such things (saith Aaron) have befallen me, and if I had eaten the sin-offering to day, should it have been good in the eyes of the Lord? In these words Aaron excuseth himselfe, by reason of his sorrow, which made him unfit and unworthy to eate of those holy things. Deutr. 12.7. & 26.14. Hos. 9.4.
The Douai Divines, somewhat to the same purpose. Natural grief of mind, made Aaron both unwilling to eat, and less apt to complete all the ceremonies: so without sin he omitted that pertained to his own commodity, offering it unto God. The Geneva notes, Moses bare with his infirmity, considering his great sorrow, but doth not leave an example to forgive them that maliciously transgress the commandment of God. The vulgar reads it, Quomodo potui comedore eam, aut placere Domino in ceremoniis meant lugubri? Vatablus, or Leo Juda, Taliaque mihi acciderunt, et si comedissem hostiam pro peccato hodiè num hoc benè factum esset in oculis Domini? Or, Mihi autem acciderunt hujusmodi, si igitur comedissem, hodie oblationem illam pro peccato, an placuisset Deo? And the sense of the place he gives thus, Mihi tamen mortui sunt filii mei, quod certè argumento est illorum sacrificium Deo non placuisse (ignorabat enim Aaron causam mortis filiorum) Si igitur comedissem quod mibi debebatur, ex eâ oblatione quomodo placuissem Deo, quum oblatio ipsa non placuerit? q. d. Non putavifore Deo gratum, quumea victima non fuerit placatus. 1Jun. gives the words another sense. Ego quoque non satis attendi ad officium mihi imperatum lege, sed per imprudentiam peccavi ut filii mei supers•ites ejusdem negligentiae & perturbationis reus sum: gratumne ei foret, si ego adhut-in peccato haerens, peccatum populi expiandum in me transtulissem.